Green Banks Leverage Private Investments for Climate Finance

In addition to creating new jobs and improving the environment Green Banks are essential to ramping-up clean energy finance. Such banks are capable of helping to unleash the vast potential of climate focused investing. Green Banks reduce the cost of clean energy and efficiency. They are helping to change market thinking by taking a holistic, long-term view of industry support.

A Green Bank is a government-created institution that facilitates private sector financing for clean technology projects. Different Green Banks have different programs, however, they all leverage public funds to attract private investment.

In addition to providing capital and information these banks encourage private sector investments by helping to mitigate risk. They also help to standardize financial products to make them easier to buy and sell.

The tools used by Green Banks include low-interest or longer-term loans, interest rate buydowns, project equity stakes, small grants, and, as the market develops, credit enhancements.

In the US there are a number of Green Banks including the New York City Energy Efficiency Corporation, the Connecticut Green Bank, the Hawaii GEMS Program and the New Jersey Energy Resiliency Bank.

Internationally Green Banks include the UK Green Investment Bank, the Japanese Green Finance Organization, the Australian Clean Energy Finance Corporation, GreenTech Malaysia.

For years we have watched Green Banks contribute to meaningful climate progress by supporting things like renewables and energy efficiency initiatives.

The potential of green investment banking is huge, however governments can contribute to or detract from this laudable initiative.

As reported by the Independent exactly one year ago, the government in the UK announced plans to sell off part of the first bank in the world established to make money out of environmentally sustainable projects.

Launched by the government in 2012, the UK's Green Investment Bank will be privatized in a move that is expected to generate £1 billion. However, Chuka Umunna, the shadow business secretary, said the bank would be destroyed by privatisation. “It is unclear how the GIB can continue to perform its unique and vital function if it is sold off and it would be incredibly short-sighted if the important role it currently plays was lost,” he said.

In 2014 the Green Investment Bank backed 22 new energy projects worth £2.5 billion and generating enough energy to power 4.2 million UK homes.

As reported by Business Green in 2014, an investment Bank boss said that the UK's Green Investment Bank could mobilize £60 billion if government allows it.

Banks are an important part of creating the necessary infrastructure to support the transition to a low carbon economy. One high profile example is EV charging stations. While electric vehicles are an important part of the transition, green banks can support charging infrastructure which is essential to the widespread adoption of EVs.

As reported by Energy Manager Today, a study by the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES) indicates that banks play a key role in the transition to a low carbon economy. This includes both expanding EV infrastructure and clean energy.

As reported by Sustainable Business, the first "Green Bank Academy" was attended by leaders from over 11 states including California, Hawaii, Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Hampshire, Washington, NY and Connecticut.

Green Banks can help fill the financing gap in the absence of government leadership. Mark Muro from the Brookings Institution, co-host of the Academy explained that Green Banks contribute to, "large-scale progress on big problems when the national government has gone absent."

In 2014 US Green Banks committed to spending $15 billion on energy Projects over 5 years. This investment could be leveraged to over US $40 billion in private investments. Here is a brief review derived from an EDF article on the major Green Banks in the US.

Connecticut's Green Bank

In 2012, Connecticut created the first green bank, known as Clean Energy Finance and Investment Authority or CEFIA. As reported by the EDF, CEFIA’s 2013 annual report indicates that for every dollar of ratepayer funds CEFIA invested, roughly $10 was invested by private sources. Much of this investment was focused on clean energy building upgrades that are part of Connecticut’s Property Assessed Clean Energy program. CEFIA also has an innovative financing solution for solar projects on commercial properties. In 2014 Connecticut's Green Bank (CEFIA), financed 1,160 projects and attracted over $180 million in private capital based on $41 million in state funds, resulting in 26.7 megawatts of new clean energy.

New York’s Green Bank

New York has the largest green bank in the US, with $1 billion in funding. Launched in 2013, New York’s Green Bank focuses on advancing the clean energy market by encouraging business partnerships.

Hawaii's Green Bank

Hawaii's Green Bank called GEMS launched in 2014 with a $150-million green bank called GEMS, that focuses on social justice. The program allows homeowners to finance solar projects that significantly reduce their power costs.

California's Green Bank

In 2014 California introduced a Senate bill that laid the groundwork for attracting private capital for a green bank that launched in 2015.

New Jersey's Green Bank

In 2014, Governor Chris Christie announced plans to launch an Energy Resilience Bank. Though technically not a green bank, the Energy Resilience Bank has proposed using federal Superstorm Sandy funds to finance the resiliency component of infrastructure projects that strengthen the state’s electricity grid during extreme weather events.

Related
Green Finance Goes Mainstream in 2016
Green Bonds Emerging as a Major Force in Green Finance
Green Bonds Climate Success Story
The Green Climate Fund Comes of Age
The Climate Investment Fund's Low Carbon Development
IDB to Double Climate Related Projects
World Bank to Finance More Renewables in the Developing World
Innovative Solar Financing Instruments
Drivers of Green Investment Growth
New Sustainability Focused Finance Instruments
Opportunities in Sustainability Finance Highlighting Renewables & Energy Efficiency
The Panama Papers Highlight the Need for Sustainability
A World Bank Action Plan to Combat Climate Change
European Commissioner for Climate Action Urges Development Banks to Divest from Fossil Fuels

Read More»

Investor Warning: Fossil Fuels and the Risk of Stranded Assets

It is becoming increasingly apparent that fossil fuels represent a substantial risk that should make investors wary. Fossil fuel reserves, including oil, gas and coal will be rendered obsolete in the coming decades, leaving investors holding valueless investments. A plethora of peer reviewed science tells us the curbing fossil fuel use is key to climate mitigation.

From widespread calamitous coastal flooding to devastating extreme weather events the need to urgently act on climate change has finally been accepted by every nation on earth. The economics of climate action is sound. A cost benefit analysis reveals the overwhelming logic. We must the eradication of fossil fuels as soon as possible. The impetus to act on climate change, once dismissed by some, is now a fact of life for all thinking people.

There is already downward pressure on the fossil fuel industry and this will only intensify in 2016 as we begin to see policy shifts and new regulatory regimes. The Paris Climate Agreement formally signals the end of fossil fuels. 

We are already seeing trillions of dollars being divested from the fossil fuel industry. Much of the money divested is being reallocated to renewable energy, the primary competition for the fossil fuel industry. Investments in fossil fuels need time to mature, however post Paris time is the one thing that fossil fuel investors do not have.

The IPCC Synthesis Report indicates that the burning of fossil fuels must be completely ended by 2100. We must work quickly to radically reduce our use of fossil fuels because the longer we wait the more it will cost. We also risk surpassing dangerous tipping points from which we will not be able to recover.  Simply put we cannot continue to burn fossil fuels if we hope to stay within the 2C upper threshold limit. 

The concerns about fossil fuels and stranded assets were reviewed in an April 8, 2016, CBC Business article by Don Pittis in which he warned investors about the dangers of fossil fuels. As he explained, the issue of stranded assets is not merely the concern of environmentalists, it is central to shrewd analyses of the investment community. Concerns about stranded assets are coming from all quarters including mainstream, credible sources, like Mark Carney, governor of the Bank of England.

Research from the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers has already announced a $50 billion drop in Canadian oil and gas investment in electrical power plant generation from fossil fuels. However, there are implications for the oil sands and pipelines.

As explained in the CBC article, a Oxford University study indicates that after 2017, fossil fuel powered electricity generation may "not be able to run long enough to pay off their capital costs, turning them into stranded assets." This study expands the stranded-assets concept to include what economists call capital.

"Investors putting money into new carbon-emitting infrastructure need to ask hard questions about how long those assets will operate for, and assess the risk of future shutdowns and writeoffs," says Cameron Hepburn, one of the academics involved in Oxford study.

"If the 2 C target is to be taken seriously, then current and future assets will have to be written off before the end of their economically useful life (become stranded assets) or we will have to rely on large-scale investments down the line in carbon capture and storage technologies that are as yet unproven and expensive," says the report.

While the Oxford study is focused on electricity generation the implications extend to the fossil fuel industry as a whole. According to Duetsche Bank at least half of all known fossil fuel reserves will need to be kept in the ground to stay within our carbon budget. 

"For their own financial benefit, what investors must consider is whether the climate risk has been properly calculated into the future income stream." Pittis wrote. "If investors in power plants, pipelines and new oil development go ahead without proper regard to climate risk and find those assets stranded, they will be worth less than advertised."

The Financial Times covered the same study and reported:

"Virtually all new fossil fuel-burning power-generation capacity will end up stranded... A similar logic can be applied to parts of the capital stock."

Carbon dioxide remain in the atmosphere for centuries so we must appreciate not just annual emissions but their cumulative totals or the global carbon budget.

The Oxford paper states that capital stock created after 2017 would break the global carbon budget. However the Financial Times article suggests that the Oxford study is premised on some optimistic assumptions and therefore it may be more difficult to keep temperatures from rising beyond the 2C upper threshold limit. This assessment suggests that the risks are even greater than those presented in the Oxford research.

Why would any sane investor put his or her money into a source of energy that is doomed to be shut down?

As explained in the FT article:

"[G]iven the longevity of a large part of the capital stock, the time for decisive change is right now, not decades in future."

As reported in the Green Market Oracle, just ahead of the Paris Climate Agreement two reports corroborated concerns about stranded assets.  One of these reports come from the Think Tank, Carbon Tracker and another comes from Critical Resource, a firm that advises fossil fuel companies.

The Carbon Tracker report indicated that more than 2.2 trillion worth of fossil fuel projects are at risk of being stranded. Anthony Hobley, chief executive at Carbon Tracker said:

"Our report offers these companies a warning [about] avoiding significant value destruction,"

The top four countries at risk from stranded fossil fuel assets are the US at $412 billion, Canada at $220 billion, China at $179 billion and Australia at $103bn. The companies with the greatest exposure are Shell, ExxonMobil and Pemex.

Despite these risks, $1.3 trillion is being spent on new oil projects and $124 billion is being spent on existing projects. We need to start with a moratorium on new fossil fuel development.

Daniel Litvin, MD of Critical Resources said.

"The critical mass point could be as soon as a couple of years down the road, which is pretty soon for an industry that has been around for 100 years."

How can the oil industry fail to see the writing on the wall? The fossil fuel industry would not be the first that failed to see clear signs of its demise. Hobley pointed to the demise of Kodak and Blockbuster as illustrations.

In the past decade, the emissions implied by the investment in power generation have been rising at 4 percent a year. The math behind this investment growth when partnered with the need for climate action make investing in fossil fuels a fool's errand.

Related
The Risks Associated with Stranded Fossil Fuel Assets
COP21 and Stranded Fossil Fuel Assets
Fossil Fuel Divestment and Stranded Assets
Infographic - Stranded Fossil Fuel Assets
Oil is a Bad Investment
The Fossil Fuel Industry has Reason to be Nervous
Fossil Fuels are a Clear and Present Danger
Study on the Fossil Fuel Industry and the Bursting of the Carbon Bubble
Graph of Fossil Fuels GHG Contributions
The Cost of Carbon
Now is the Time to End our Reliance on Fossil Fuels
Fossil Fuels are making the Planet Uninhabitable
Fossil Fuels are the Most Hated Industry in the US
Exxon is not the Only Bad Apple: The Whole Fossil Fuel Industry is Rotten to the Core

Read More»

Green Finance Goes Mainstream in 2016

The world is embracing green finance as never before and all expectations are that this will increase as we move towards a low carbon economy. Financial systems should play an important role in the green economic transition said, Zhou Xiaochuan, the Governor of the People's Bank of China. Zhou was speaking at the Green Finance Symposium which took place on Saturday, April 15th in Washington.
_______________________________

After years of volatility, green finance is emerging as a central part of our efforts to address climate change and transform our energy infrastructure. Green finance is preoccupied with adapting to the impacts of climate change and/or reducing greenhouse gas emissions. It is the means by which we can stream tremendous amounts of needed capital into emissions free sources of power.

Although a precise definition of green finance (GF) is somewhat elusive, generally speaking it can be understood as sustainable investment and banking, where investment and lending decisions are taken on the basis of environmental considerations. This applies to both the public and the private sector and it specifically entails environmental screening and sustainability focused risk assessment.

For years, GF was dismissed as being too risky. Now in the wake of the signing of the Paris climate accord, lenders cannot ignore the economics of climate action that make clean energy an attractive opportunity. Governments began seriously investing in clean technologies in 2005. However, the early years were fraught with challenges, not the least of which was the economic crisis of 2007 – 2008. Nonetheless, between 2005 and 2010, there was a 200 percent increase in the growth of GF.

There is well warranted optimism that 2016 will be the year in which green finance comes of age. Governments, businesses and global organizations are all getting on-board to make this a landmark year for GF.

In an article published in the Huffington Post, Nick Robins, the Co-Director of the UNEP Inquiry into a Sustainable Financial System, said:

"From a strategic perspective, 2015 built a new set of policy foundations for the global economy, signaling new directions for the financial system…So, if 2015 designed the foundations, the task for the financial community in 2016 is to take the practical steps to deliver the reallocation in capital that’s required, and doing this in ways that result in an orderly transition in global markets."

At a G7 meeting last summer, the world’s leading economies agreed to phase out fossil fuels. At this meeting, Angela Merkel said the leading industrialized countries were committed to raising $100 billion in annual climate financing by 2020 from public and private sources.

According to a new report, green finance has what it takes to deliver decisive climate action. The report says that GF is capable of keeping temperatures from rising beyond the upper threshold limits of 1.5 to 2 degrees Celsius set in the Paris climate accord. The report was produced by a partnership between Bloomberg New Energy Finance, Ceres and Ken Locklin of Impax Asset Management. The report, titled Mapping the Gap: The Road From Paris, finds that there is enough money in the global economy to finance the transition to clean sources of energy.

We have gleaned valuable insights about the feasibility of GF from a number of pilot projects. A report from the Climate Investment Fund (CIF) shows that green finance works. The report titled, "Learning by Doing: The CIF’s Contribution to Climate Finance," studied GF in 48 countries. CIF oversees more than $8 billion, which it uses to support projects in cleantech, forests, climate resilience and renewable energy.

This year, the Green Climate Fund has come of age and there are now a wide range of initiatives that support the growth of GF, including the SDGs and a rapidly growing green bond market.  The IMF is now focusing on climate change and the World Bank along with the IBD are contributing to the funding of clean energy in the developing world.

The G20 has indicated that it is committed to green finance. Mark Carney, the Governor of the Bank of England and Chairman of the Financial Stability Board, has said that GF has grown up and it is no longer a “niche”. In March, Carney said that in a bid to mainstream climate friendly funds, the G20 will make green finance a "priority". The G20 has explored the concept through its Green Finance Study Group and the subject will receive special attention at September's G20 meeting in Hangzhou.

Many governments are gearing up to get involved with GF and some nations have already implemented policies. As reported by Bloomberg, Indonesia plans to limit the ability of banks to lend money to projects that are deemed environmentally destructive. While this is a move will curb slash and burn agricultural practices in the country, it can be applied to any set of environmental parameters. A May 2015 WWF report stated that there are four major banks in Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore that have embedded environmental factors as part of their credit-decision process. Last fall, the Association of Banks in Singapore introduced guidelines on responsible financing.

A 2016 UNEP report titled, "The Financial System We Need," declares that the UK is a global hub for GF. London’s financial community is positioning themselves to lead green finance, while Hong Kong and Singapore are already leaders in GF.

As explained by Achim Steiner, Executive Director of the United Nations Environment, "2016 is set to be the year of green finance. Across the world, we are seeing a growing number of countries aligning their financial systems with the sustainability imperative."

Governments, financial institutions, investors and businesses have been pouring capital into clean energy at ever increasing rates. After a protracted period of intense volatility, green finance has finally arrived. It is now an unstoppable global force that is helping to build a clean power infrastructure.

Source: Global Warming is Real

Related
Green Bonds Emerging as a Major Force in Green Finance
The Green Climate Fund Comes of Age
The Climate Investment Fund's Low Carbon Development
IDB to Double Climate Related Projects
World Bank to Finance More Renewables in the Developing World
Innovative Solar Financing Instruments
Drivers of Green Investment Growth
New Sustainability Focused Finance Instruments
Opportunities in Sustainability Finance Highlighting Renewables & Energy Efficiency
The Panama Papers Highlight the Need for Sustainability
A World Bank Action Plan to Combat Climate Change
European Commissioner for Climate Action Urges Development Banks to Divest from Fossil Fuels
A Large and Growing Chorus is Calling for an End to Fossil Fuel Subsidies

Read More»

Green Bonds Emerging as a Major Force in Green Finance

The momentum driving green bonds is growing and they have emerged as a major instrument of green finance. Green bonds generate funding for sustainable development and clean energy technology. They attract debt investment capital and drive innovation in renewable energy, sustainable agriculture, forests and other environmental causes. At COP21 green bonds were touted as being one of the vehicles that could help deliver $100 billion annually by 2020 to support of climate action.

A 2014 HSBC report indicates that we will need to see $300 billion a year in investments to keep us below the upper threshold limit of 2 Celsius. If even a fraction of the $80 trillion bond market moved to environmental finance, it could tip the scales in the climate fight, says Angus McCrone, Chief Editor for Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

According to Ceres, we need to invest around $1 trillion each year in clean energy projects worldwide by 2050 to ensure that global warming is limited to 2 degrees Celsius.

The first green bonds were issued in 2007 by development banks. As of 2012 we were seeing investments of around $2 billion, by 2013 that grew to $11 billion and by 2014 it was around $36 billion. In 2014 three green bond indexes were launched (S&P Green Bond Index; Bank of America; Barclays Bank and index creator MSCI).

In 2015 there was $42 billion worth of green bonds issued. These bonds have grown quickly over the past few years and as reported by the EDF, in 2016 they are forecasted to reach about $50 billion.

Green bonds have become a powerful means for corporations to broadcast their environmental credentials. Apple issued $1.5 billion in bonds earlier this year dedicated to financing clean energy projects at its facilities worldwide. New York Metropolitan Transportation Authority issued $500 million in green bonds and Georgia Power issued $325 million to support investment in renewable energy.

As reported by Sustainable Business, in 2015 the World Bank issued $3.1 billion in green bonds including $600 million in fixed-rate 10-year green bonds. The Oslo Stock Exchange began listing green bonds. SunEdison's yieldco TerraForm Power, issued $800 million for 8-year junk bonds. Other top issuers were European Investment Bank with $5.6 billion in Climate Awareness bonds, German Development Bank KfW with $3.5 billion and GDF Suez with $3.4 billion. Toyota issued $1.75 billion, French Development Bank AfD issued $1.3 billion and Iberdrola issued $1 billion in green bonds. Vestas wind energy also issued green bonds.

"We are convinced that green bonds play an important role in unlocking the green market capital that is necessary to finance the transformation to a cleaner and more sustainable future," states Stefan Reiner, Director in Corporate Finance and responsible for the bond business of German development banks,

Mexico has successfully used green bonds as a financing mechanism to reduce emissions. In 2014 the Huffington Post reported that Africa will issue one billion in green bonds. In March 2015 the first Green Bond issued in Asia easily raised $500 million.

Some early concerns related to green bonds are being addressed including the lack of standardization. In January 2014 a group of leading banks took preliminary steps to create standardization in the market by issuing something called Green Bond Principles. As explained by Ceres’ Mindy Lubber: "As standards get stronger, we’ll see more growth in the market."

Groups such as Green Bond Principles and the Climate Bonds Initiative are giving investors the tools they need. To see a report and guide from Lloyds Bank on green bonds click here.

Green bonds are a game changer. Growth in the green bonds sector is evidence that banks are starting to see the potential of low carbon infrastructure projects. If a fraction of the 80 - 90 trillion bond market were diverted to green bonds it would significantly advance climate finance.

Related
Green Finance Goes Mainstream in 2016
The Green Climate Fund Comes of Age
The Climate Investment Fund's Low Carbon Development
IDB to Double Climate Related Projects
World Bank to Finance More Renewables in the Developing World
Innovative Solar Financing Instruments
Drivers of Green Investment Growth
New Sustainability Focused Finance Instruments
Opportunities in Sustainability Finance Highlighting Renewables & Energy Efficiency
The Panama Papers Highlight the Need for Sustainability
A World Bank Action Plan to Combat Climate Change
European Commissioner for Climate Action Urges Development Banks to Divest from Fossil Fuels
A Large and Growing Chorus is Calling for an End to Fossil Fuel Subsidies

Read More»

IDB to Double Climate Related Projects

In October last year Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) announced that it is going to double its climate related projects by increasing financing by between 25 and 30 percent by 2020. The IDB was established in 1959, it offers long-term financing for economic, social and institutional development in Latin America and the Caribbean.

As reviewed in an October, 2015 press release, starting in 2018 the bank will begin screening projects for climate risks and resilience. This will ensure that money invested goes towards environmentally sustainable projects and achieves the stated goal of helping these countries to meet their INDC targets.

The IDB is working with private sector finance to provide financing for adaptation and resilience. As a newly consolidated entity the IDB will offer innovative financial products, such as green bonds.

Historically the IDB has devoted 14 percent of its financing to climate related projects between 2012 and 2014.

Related
Green Finance Goes Mainstream in 2016
Green Bonds Emerging as a Major Force in Green Finance
The Green Climate Fund Comes of Age
The Climate Investment Fund's Low Carbon Development
World Bank to Finance More Renewables in the Developing World
Innovative Solar Financing Instruments
Drivers of Green Investment Growth
New Sustainability Focused Finance Instruments
Opportunities in Sustainability Finance Highlighting Renewables & Energy Efficiency
The Panama Papers Highlight the Need for Sustainability
A World Bank Action Plan to Combat Climate Change
European Commissioner for Climate Action Urges Development Banks to Divest from Fossil Fuels
A Large and Growing Chorus is Calling for an End to Fossil Fuel Subsidies

Read More»

The Green Climate Fund Comes of Age

The Green Climate Fund (GCF) is a United Nations climate finance mechanism designed to assist the developing world.by mobilizing funding for mitigation and adaptation. The GCF mission is to expand collective human action to respond to climate change. It will do this in large part  through the transfer cutting-edge climate technologies. This includes things like smart-grid technologies, electric vehicles and components used in solar electricity generation.

The GCF draws upon resources from public, private, and philanthropic sources. It was first established at COP16 as an operating entity of the Financial Mechanism of the Convention under Article 11. The GCF supports projects, programmes, policies and other activities in developing country Parties. The Fund is governed by the GCF Board.

Dollars and Sense

The GCF is an important part of green finance and it is essential to climate action in poorer nations. Advanced economies have agreed to jointly mobilize $100 billion for the fund every year by 2020. The G20 has promised to contribute $10 billion to the GCF and leaders at a G7 Summit in June 2015, reiterated the GCF's role as a key institution for global climate finance.

As of February 2016, the Green Climate Fund had raised $10.2 billion in pledges from 42 state governments.

In March the US agreed to formalize their $3 billion pledge that was made in 2014 and send its first installment of $500 million. As the world's largest economy the  US is also the world's largest donor.

Formative Hurdles

There were a host of problems that plagued the GCF from its inception including the fact that the adaptation fund has been persistently below its capitalisation targets

Very early on it came to light that Japan had used its initial climate finance to construct three coal fired plants in Indonesia. This prompted green groups to send a letter the GTF asking them to adopt an explicit policy to ensure that its funds will not be used directly or indirectly for financing fossil fuel or other polluting energy initiatives.

The GCF has also been criticized for its lack of accountability and transparency, but in 2016 the GCF has vowed to disclose as much information as possible including webcasts of their meetings.

Coming of Age

As explained in a recent Nature article, "The Green Climate Fund (GCF) has had an inauspicious start to life — but 2016 could be the year it springs into action."

"This year will be important for demonstrating that the GCF can fund transformational actions in developing countries," says Niranjali Amerasinghe, who studies climate finance at the World Resources Institute in Washington DC.

As of December 2015 the fund had approved $168 million for eight climate projects, including wetland resilience programmes in Peru and climate-resilient infrastructure in Bangladesh. In March the fund approved projects worth $2.5 billion for 2016. For example, Odisha, India will benefit from a GCF financed project that will raise the ground water levels in ponds leading to increase in irrigation facility in the 13 districts of the state.

Related
The Climate Investment Fund's Low Carbon Development
Obama Pledges $3 Billion to the Green Climate Fund
Why We Need the Green Climate Fund
Infographic - Why We Need a Green Climate Fund
Reasons to be Optimistic about a Global Climate Agreement in 2015

Read More»

World Bank to Finance More Renewables in the Developing World

After being called out for hypocrisy, the World Bank is working to redeem itself through massive investments in renewable energy. The International Monetary Fund and the World Bank Group are holding their annual "Spring Meetings events" in Washington, DC, on April 12-17, 2016. It will be attended by thousands of government officials, journalists, civil society organizations, and participants from the academia and private sectors. The meetings will feature seminars, regional briefings, press conferences, and many other events focused on the global economy, international development, and the world's financial markets.

The World Bank has repeatedly warned of dramatic temperature increases and has called for bold action and countries to adopt aggressive targets to cut greenhouse gas emissions. In 2013 World Bank President, Dr. Jim Yong Kim, pledged that the bank will do everything it can to address climate change. The bank has been looking at business through a "climate lens" he said and he further suggested that we include the cost of carbon in energy pricing (carbon pricing) and end fossil fuel subsidies.

While the bank supports renewable energy, they have been criticized for simultaneously supporting fossil fuels. Between 2008 and 2013 the bank provided US$18 billion, or almost half of its energy lending, for fossil fuels and coal in particular.

This is at odds with Jim Yong Kim Promise to factor in global warming "with every investment we make and every action we take." In a Washing Post op-ed he warned that "we need to get serious fast” to avoid the looming “climate catastrophe."

In the wake of this disconnect between word and deed the World Bank has decided to increase its spending on renewable energy in 2016. They are specifically planing to invest in enough renewable energy in developing countries to power 150 million homes.

As outlined by US News, these plans were released in 59-page climate action plan that outlines how these investments will help poorer nations to meet the goals set in the Paris climate accord.

The World Bank's private-sector arm will increase its climate investments from $2.3 billion-a-year to $3.5 billion a year by 2020. The stated goal is to spur a $13 billion a year in private investments.

The bank also plans to help developing countries add 30 gigawatts of electricity to power 150 million homes without emissions of heat-trapping gases.

The World Bank Group said it spends about $10.3 billion a year on climate, which is slated to rise to $16 billion a year by 2020.

finance, financing, credit, capital, cash, funding, funds, money, resources, support, grow, growth, clean, low carbon, renewable, energy, power,

Related
A World Bank Action Plan to Combat Climate Change
The World Bank: Declining Climate Change Funding
World Bank President Advocates Putting a Price on Carbon
World Bank Climate Change Warning
World Bank Report Predicts 4°C Temperature Increase
World Banks Warning: We Need to Act Now on Climate Change
European Commissioner for Climate Action Urges Development Banks to Divest from Fossil Fuels
A Large and Growing Chorus is Calling for an End to Fossil Fuel Subsidies

Read More»

Summary of Recent Reports on the Costs of Climate Action/Inaction

Reports are coming in that make it hard to ignore the economic benefits of action on climate change. This includes recent reports from Citi the world's third largest bank and the London School of Economics, one of the most prestigious and respected schools in the world.

In April 2015 the World Health Organization (WHO) and the US Department of Energy published reports that demonstrate just how high the costs of inaction could be.

According to a study by the WHO, the financial costs of air pollution in Europe alone amounts to $1. trillion each year from death and disease. This is one tenth of Europe's gross national product. The economic costs of deaths alone represent $1.4 trillion.

As reported by Bloomberg, a US Energy Department report indicates that in the US, extreme weather costs about $33 billion each year.

According to a Tufts University report commissioned by the NRDC, the costs of climate inaction to the US economy is equivalent to more than $3.8 trillion annually or 3.6 percent of the nation's GDP by 2100.  Hurricane damage, real estate losses, increased energy costs and water costs add up to a price tag of 1.8 percent of U.S. GDP, or almost $1.9 trillion annually (in today’s dollars) by 2100.  Hurricane damages: $422 billion Real estate losses: $360 billion Increased energy costs: $141 billion Water costs: $950 billion.

The NRDC report indicates that if left unchecked global warming will cause drastic changes to the planet’s climate, with average temperature increases of 13 degrees Fahrenheit in most of the United States and 18 degrees Fahrenheit in Alaska over the next 100 years.

As reported in skeptical science, peer-reviewed projections indicate that the costs of inaction on climate change outweigh the costs of addressing the problem by trillions of dollars. 

"The benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions outweigh the costs by trillions of dollars. Combining the results of the report by the German Institute of Economic Research and Watkiss et al. (2005) studies, we find that the total cost of climate action (cost plus damages) by 2100 is approximately $12 trillion, while the cost of inaction (just damages) is approximately $20 trillion."

Image Credit: Skeptical Science

Related
Acting on Climate Change Makes Good Economic Sense According to Citibank
An LSE Cost Benefit Analysis Supports Climate Action
Action on Climate Change a Cost Benefit Analysis
The Cost of Delaying Action to Stem Climate Change
Climate Change: Frequency, Costs and Mortality (World Meteorological Organisation)
Graphics - Cost of Delaying Action to Stem Climate Change
Businesses Feel the Heat from Declining Labor Productivity
Economic Benefits of Combating Climate Change (IIED)
Economic Costs of Combating Climate Change (IPCC)
Reducing Fossil Fuel Use: The Longer We Wait the More it will Cost
Infographic - How Much Would it Cost to Go Green Globally?
Graphic - The Cost of Mitigating Climate Change
The Financial Costs of Biodiversity Loss
Extreme Weather and the Costs of Climate Change
The Costs of Global Warming
The Costs of Climate Change Related Flooding

Read More»